|
|
Posted by Steve Pugh on 06/07/06 08:10
Chris Gunn <cgunn@bizynet.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 17:42:52 -0600, ted.boomer@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>At the start of this thread I asked for comments on
>>http://www.managetech.co.uk which had some nice graphics, but was done
>>in front page and so the code wasn't good.
>>
>>I spent about four hours setting up a css sheet (and sourcing css bells
>>and whistles for the site) and then converted the whole thing into very
>>tight code in an hour or so, using a text editor.
You need to test by resizing your text in your browsers. Make it a
little larger and your nav vanished behind your main content. This is
a typical pitfall of using absolute positioning - this design could
easily have been done without it.
>You did not set the web page margins in the BODY definition. In IExplorer
>(at 800 wide) you have scroll bar at the foot because the default margins
>are too wide. Works fine in FireFox, which sets smaller ones.
Did you test by setting your screen resolution to 800x600 or by sizing
your browser window at a larger resolution? There are differences in
window chrome as well that mean that sometimes things fit in a full
screen 800x600 browser but not in a windowed 800x600 browser. Note
that I haven't tested this page under those conditions so I don't know
whether that's the case here.
Then again, changing the design to a fluid one rather than a fixed
width one would also solve the problem.
>Only a very limited number of CSS assets have been added to the other
>browsers. In Netscape Navgator 4.08 your page is a disaster.
Best thing to do is to simply not allow NN4 to see the CSS. It's not a
CSS capable browser by today's standards (it never really was) so it
should get the plain HTML code with no styling same as NN3.
> I haven't
>installed a newer version of Netscrape for a number of reasons. Mostly, it
>lets me know I've gone too far and too fancy.
You have FireFox which is substantially the same rendering engine with
a different user interface. I don't think many people bother
installing NN6/7/8 for every day testing. The market share is so low
that the differences in rendering from other Gecko browsers doesn't
make it worth. For full on testing of really big projects, maybe, but
not for everyday stuff.
>Whatever you used for CSS did not comply with all of the standards.
Quite correct. Missing units after a number of length values.
Otherwise its fine.
>There are missing quote marks
Where? He was inconsistent about using quotes around URLs in his CSS
but by the standards they are optional. Some older browsers (several
versions of Mac IE in particular) had problems with the use of no
quotes vs single quotes vs double quotes but that's not generally
considered a problem these days.
>and the last line (just before the "}" is missing
>the semicolon.
; is a separator not a terminator. It's use after the last property in
a rule is entirely optional. And in nine years of writing and testing
CSS I have never encountered a browser, nor even heard of one, that
cared about this.
>What you did works okay for the big two but others may be
>more strict.
You mean less strict. Any browser that failed on the two issues you
listed would be deviating from the standard.
>Hit http://www.htmlvalidator.com and get a copy to try.
Ah, that explains it. You're trusting the opinions of that crank
Wiersch. Maybe he can give an example of a browser that cares about
the last ; in a rule?
Steve
--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|